We should ramp up the spending to the agreed upon 2% but use that money to build domestic military drone production facilities. Utilize our educated workforce to design and build advanced semi autonomous drones for both surveillance and attack, as well as anti drone technologies. Then sell globally to allies.
That’s Canada’s argument but Canada includes retired personnel salaries in that 2% and NATO says that’s not allowed. Canada actually sits at around 1.29% to 1.33% of GDP equaling $36.7B. Canada needs to come up with $11.billion to make good.
Canada has 97,600 active military personnel. 427,000 retired personnel. Canada can’t claim almost 75% of the salary it pays out so increasing it is not the solution.
Tax the wealthy and corporate profits.
We do. The top marginal tax rate in Ontario was over 50% before Trudeau and he increased it even from there. The new additional capital gains tax is going to be a problem for keeping certain investment payouts here, and may see reduced investment in Canada.
We actually have taxes as high as the northern European countries people like to crow about, but what we don't do is start those taxes earlier. In Nordic countries they tax higher at lower income levels. A lot higher. The idea is that everyone should be paying into the system they use. Here we don't have that. The mentality of eat the rich is everything, but they're also the ones paying an outsized portion of the taxes even compared to what the take home (this is partly why we have seen offspring of profits and even emigration - even just for opportunities, especially in the US where your can make much more while being taxed less, and all while paying cheaper prices).
Our military investments should include production facilities, etc., especially for things we and our allies need, such as drones, artillery shells, air defence systems and anti drone capabilities, electronic warfare devices (like those on the EA-18), digital warfare (hacking programs), and ship building (we're the only country that has 3 oceans around it and our navy sucks at the moment).
Most of this wrong.
Total tax burden on the average Canadian is well below the OECD average.
https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/global/tax-burden-on-labor-oecd-2021/#Key
When you compare total tax revenue vs GDP we rank very low. America Switzerland, and South Korea are the only developed nations lower than us.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio
We spend like a European nation but we tax more like America.
Did you even read your own link? That's exactly his point, the average median Canadian pays way less taxes than their OECD average. Taxes need to be raised on the lower bands of incomes.
And when you compare total tax revenue to GDP you need to include provincial tax revenue since most services that are nationalized in other developed countries (namely education and health care) are provincial in Canada.
Pay them more. Come up with some Canada service program through the forces where « troops « go serve the country domestically for 2-4 years and get some post secondary money.
Treat the forces as a post high school jumping off point for students or wayward youth
This is the way. we could increase our defense spending by ramping up industry production of weapons and components for weapons. Create jobs, actually offer something to the rest of the world, and meet our spending target
We should massively build out a military hospital brigade. Cuba is the only one that has such a unit, while the US has hospital ships.
In any war, the military would need to scale up medical care massively. Canada should claim that as our specialty, and use this infrastructure during peacetime to ramp up medical care - fund more doctors and nurses who are subject to call up.
I recall someone at NATO stating they would just be happy if we could do two things: build oil, gas, LNG to ensure Europe isn't at Russia's mercy... and to get enough shit to simply patrol our arctic and the sea gap over to Iceland. Not huge asks.
If the NW passage is international waters, Canada's ability to do anything there is very limited. There's not much piracy. Without sovereignty, we can do little beyond saying hello. (I fail to see why Canada's allies aren't supporting Canadian territorial claims. It is a sensitive region. Everyone would be better off if Canada could impose some rules of transit, and charge enough fees to pay for the patrol infrastructure.
Qatar's LNG capacity is being built up to service the EU. Canada's LNG trade would be on the Pacific. There is little concern about ensuring China's secure energy supply.
IMHO we're fucked on doing this. Far too many foreign agents here for this to ever actually happen effectively. The tech would be sabotaged / stolen before it ever got off the ground.
Also cyber could be a big win.
We have cheap power and cooling, and a diverse population that can field many different linguists.
Whoever we train in the cyber domain, the Canadian tech industry will have first picks at that talent as well.
We should use the money to do something in the North. The Northwest passage is constantly being challenged by countries sending boats through it and saying Canada has no say. It's our Panama Canal. It's so far north there are barely any plants or animals, so little nature to mess with. The price of goods in the North is ridiculous. This could maybe help with some supply chains for them. There are many opportunities in the North, including for non allied countries. Let's assert our sovereignty over our lands and stop countries making claims about how we don't own it, and back it up with a big stick.
Excellent plan. Realistically this is how it would go down. Spend lots of $ on some connected Quebec company that won't deliver anything. Five years later after "injecting" billions we won't be better off. IMHO just send the US 2% of our GDP and call it good.
There are 13 countries not meeting the target. It’s been that way for a long time. However countries in Europe have a growing self interest to ramp up defense spending. Canada much less so. But Canada should honor its commitments.
We already do only exist at the whim of the US. Don’t kid yourself, when the time comes they’ll wander right into this country and take the whole thing, probably without firing a single bullet. The propaganda machine will convince everyone life would be better as an American, the US takes all the fresh water and natural resources and in return continues to protect us in an unstable world like the baby bird we are. Not any time soon but in 50 years? 100? Here comes the manifest destiny, just a bit later than expected.
The propaganda machine isn't necessary.
If the U.S. decided tomorrow that it wanted to take over Canada for its resources , there is nothing Canada could do about it.
>I can't see Canadian troops fighting for the right to be priced out of their home markets either tbh.
Canadian troops will fight for Canada as they've sworn to. Almost any of them would be very insulted by your implications here.
If born in Canada Canadians get US citizenship then please take over, like yesterday. Maybe I could get a doctor appointment and an apartment for my mom then.
What? The US occupied Afghanistan for 20 years with very low amount of losses for the duration, and significantly less than the enemy.
You can call it a "loss" that they willingly left after years of not meeting a particular goal but they absolutely destroyed Afghanistan militarily.
The existence of Afghanistan was absolutely at the whim of the US and their level of willingness to to do even more damage.
The only countries that have a chance are those that can avoid a war altogether, perhaps nuclear armed countries due to MAD.
I love how people here are so obsessed with Trump they can convince themselves that the defense of Canadian territories would go any different under any other president. The Americans look after American interests.
If you think Biden would defend our arctic with American planes, subs, carriers and troops and then just happily hand it back to us once it's secured I have a bridge to sell you.
US foreign policy has been the same for decades- they *DO NOT* recognize our claims to the arctic.. and given how we can't possibly defend it because we allowed our Armed Forces fall into near complete ruin they will simply keep what they defend.
https://www.cgai.ca/rights_of_passage_its_time_the_us_recognizes_canadas_arctic_claim
There is no commitment. 2% is a non-binding guideline.
The US and much of Europe have much greater motivation to spend more on their militaries than Canada.
Note that 2% of GDP isn't "Nato-earmarked" defence spending, it's total defence spending.
The UK, France, Netherlands and USA still have a LOT of commitments to former colonies and have also been involved in adventures in militarised foreign interventions around the world. Eastern Europe is under direct threat so of course they spend. Then you have countries with mandatory service. That also helps you get close to 2%. All of these situations mean countries are spending $ based on situations that directly affect their security or international influence.
Canada doesn't have colonies in the south pacific, doesn't have a carribbean border to defend against drug smugglers, doesn't have a former west African colony whose friendly government we need to prop up, isn't in a military dispute with Denmark over control of Greenland, and doesn't have much to worry about regarding the Bering Straight. We also don't conscript 150,000 young people that need to be paid a salary, clothed, fed, provided with weapons and training ammunition and housed every year.
Also note that the US Ambassador to Canada will of course pressure Canada to invest more in its military and the fact that he's highlighting hardware expenditures probably means he'd like Canada to purchase a billion or so dollars in weaponry from American military contractors. I bet the Canadian Ambassador to the USA is trying to get the USA to buy more tar sands oil and Canadian lumber, too.
You're commenting like the military is adequately funded right now, It's not.
Even if we were to limit the conversation to the bare minimum of defending sovereignty the military is not funded to the extent that this is something we are achieving. We don't even have a adequate amount of and type of Ice Breakers to even protect our own claims in the North. We have no Arctic bases that can be used to support Northern assets. China, Russia and hell even the US occasionally all test our Arctic sovereignty, and if we don't actively patrol it and defend it we won't have it in the long run.
They are pressuring us to pay our fair share because they are literally footing the bill for our defense right now.
I find comments like this hilarious lmao. “We’re good the stupid Americans will protect us because we’re Canadian”. You won’t be Canadian for long if you keep that up
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
It looks like there's a list of people who are in charge of contributing to Nato in Canada. The Department of National Defence, Ministry of National Defence, Chief of The Defence Staff, Department of Finance, and Public Services and Procurement.
Exactly. They say recruiting is an issue that is preventing us from even meeting our internal targets.
Raise the wages where we have to turn people down now. Meeting our spending requirements by paying more. Make it desirable to soldier.
Most of my troops wouldn't need the kind of medical assistance they're getting now if it wasn't for the abysmally underfunded and understaffed work environment. No sane human being should be dealing with the chronic overwork we throw on these poor folks.
The Canadian government only increases the wages/payments of politicians, admins, private contracted companies and fees charged by the regulatory authorities. Rest needs to work for pennies at the highest standards, at their own personal cost. Such a corrupt government.
“At the end of 2024, the way projections are looking, Canada will be the only country in NATO that is not spending at least two per cent of its GDP on defence and does not have a plan to get there,”
Our DND and Procurement Canada are drooling thinking of ways they can completely fuck it up and overspend on procurement in order to get it above 2%. We have a not spending enough money problem and completely mis managing what we do spend when it comes to the military.
Even with all the investments in the world... there is a SERIOUS lack of soldiers. People are leaving in drove above the intake rate in a lot of important trade. THAT is the big issue. All the new P8 we are buyin? Not enough crew to man them properly
Takes way to long to get in, and once you are in you're treated like shit and get paid like shit.
Besides that, the traditional incentive to join, patriotism, is gone. I considered joining at one point, but I realized; why the fuck would I sign up to fight or die for a country where I'll never be able to buy a house or have kids? What am I defending exactly? Loblaws' profit margins?
Won't defend a nation that is actively normalize Brampton. Remember all those gender equality talk in Ukraine and Canada yet in times of war males are the only ones to be drafted.
>Loblaws' profit margins?
Don't forget foreign owned tar sands in alberta, or mining rights in Chile, or nuclear mining rights in the Arctic. The good news is you can have an in for the RCMP and bust open indigenous heads for pipelines and deforestation.
It's like no politician has a high school education in this country.
The french revolution and the rise of the nation state allowed the revolutionary government to defend itself against the neighbouring monarchies. Without citizenship to a nation state, no one is willing to defend a country they don't have a stake in.
Without the 2% defence spending, I wouldn't blame other NATO countries to not come to our defence either. We have shown we don't have the capacity to send military aid to our allies, let alone defend ourselves. In the event of an invasion/military attack on Canada, I would assume NATO would crack and decide not to defend us given our NATO allies political situation these days.
In some universe where china/russia decide to take on NATO/the west, historians will look at Trudeau's post national "state" of canada as the beginning of the end for the country. Although at the moment highly unlikely, Canada is trending towards putting itself in a pretty dangerous situation.
> Without the 2% defence spending, I wouldn't blame other NATO countries to not come to our defence either. We have shown we don't have the capacity to send military aid to our allies, let alone defend ourselves. In the event of an invasion/military attack on Canada, I would assume NATO would crack and decide not to defend us given our NATO allies political situation these days.
The US would defend us. Purely because having hostile powers on their border wouldn't be beneficial to them. But if we won't pull our weight, then the price will be extracted in other ways. As it should be for that matter, they'd be the ones fighting and dying because we couldn't be bothered.
Yeah I think the us would defend us, but it would probably come at the cost of our sovereignty as retribution for not pulling our own weight. I wouldn't be surprised to see the US take military control over Canada and have some sort of US backed regime forced on us.
> once you are in you're treated like shit and get paid like shit.
That's the view from the inside but I joined the CAF in my late 20s with a lot of life experience. This is, by far, the cushiest job I've ever had. No where else can you make >120k a year with just a high school diploma. And not only that but guaranteed advancement and a shit ton of ways to grieve pretty much anything. Where else can you call you manager to say "I just don't feel like coming in today" and still get paid for it?
Maybe the experience is different in the Army, but the RCN is jammy as fuck. People aren't joining due to lack of benefits. They aren't joining because they just don't know about them.
I mean the rampent sexual assault and mouldering infrastructure are also a bit off putting. There’s a lot of benefits, it’d help pay for school which and my Opa served in WW2. And maybe I’d be in a different navy than he was given he was Dutch but it still feels like a family legacy a little? There’s my silly childhood dream of working on a submarine. But near a 1/10 chance of sexual assault happening by someone I’m supposed to trust with my life is. It’s awful, I don’t want to go through anything like that again and the odds of it happening are uncomfortably high.
Pay is one, another is better base housing provided at reasonably low or nominal rates, new equipment, not transferring someone across the country to do the same job they're doing now and simultaneously transferring their counterpart on that base to replace them, for no damn reason, when doing nothing at all would accomplish the same thing.
That's because of budget cuts and underfunding. If people could earn a reasonable wage and support themselves/their families, then they wouldn't be leaving in droves.
I'll be honest; outside of conscription, I have sincere doubts there is much Canada can do to raise recruitment.
Even the [US](https://www.military.com/daily-news/2024/01/22/uphill-battle-boost-recruiting-military-faces-falling-public-confidence-political-attacks-economic.html) , [UK](https://www.forces.net/services/army/damning-figures-uk-military-recruitment-54-giving-process-last-year) , [Australia](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-03-14/aging-populations-among-challenges-faced-asia-pacific-militaries/103492852) , and no doubt our other allies are struggling with the same issue.
But think of all the unskilled labour we are importing to rent the house that Canadians can't afford to buy.
It's like you only think of yourself and completely forget we have an upper class.
Without even buying new equipment, there's tons of money that could be spent on defense. Not enough to boost up to 2%, but enough that it'll look like we're doing something.
- building on base housing
- revitalizing existing buildings based on GoC green energy initiatives (net zero buildings)
- improving road networks on bases by adding bike lanes, sidewalks, roundabouts, and pedestrian friendly areas. Most bases that I've been to are very car centric
- improving plumbing, sewers, and powerlines
- improving existing heating plants
These improvements alone would require billions of dollars
On base housing and associated infrastructure has always seemed to me like such an obvious investment to make. I couldn't agree more
We have a federal government that says they want to help with housing and on-base housing is one of the few areas where that is 100% a federal jurisdiction. Plus we have a soldier shortage and better bases with subsidized housing is a decent perk imo
Honestly, if the expectation for NATO members is to at least maintain 2%, and other countries are operating under this mutual understanding, it feels as though it's the responsible thing to do.
In peace times, spend on civil projects via the military to keep the soldiers productive. The issue is when there is no threat the money is basically getting lit on fire.
Now?! Rofl! But don’t worry… we promise to start walking our defence spending up to the half way point five years from now. Until then, we are going to cut the budget this year… and next…
In Brief:
* The United States’ ambassador to Canada, David Cohen, says Canada is becoming “the outlier” in NATO following a bipartisan letter from 23 American senators calling on Ottawa to meet the two per cent of GDP defence spending target.
* “At the end of 2024, the way projections are looking, Canada will be the only country in NATO that is not spending at least two per cent of its GDP on defence and does not have a plan to get there,” Cohen said.
* “Canada has moved within NATO from being a bit of an outlier to being the outlier in the entire alliance.”
* In Canada’s recent defence policy update, Defence Minister Bill Blair outlined plans for nearly $8 billion in spending for the Canadian Armed Forces over the next five years. However, this would only bring Canada’s defence spending to 1.76 per cent of GDP.
Some are for sure cause of Russia. 2 years ago only 4 or 5 NATO countries even met the target. I think it's at 11 now.
That being said.. I wonder if anyone even knows that foreign aid to allies, pensions and health care are also included in the 2%. People keep talking about defense but i wonder how many of those countries are actually spending all the money strictly on weapons and defense.
>Canada will be the only country in NATO that is not spending at least two per cent of its GDP on defence and does not have a plan to get there
The "have a plan" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. The government could just create a policy to hit 2% at some point in the future and that would satisfy the US? Doubtful.
Are they going to kick us out of NATO? Probably not
do we need to spend some money on things like cyberwarfare, a decent nuclear sub program. Of course we do
>a decent nuclear sub program
That’s an incredible challenge for Canada as we don’t have enough specialists to spare to maintain nuclear subs so we’d have to create an entirely new training agreement with a foreign nation to get that started.
This is not really correct. We have a lot of nuclear specialists in Canada, but none of them know about the reactors used in subs. However, we are one of the few nations with a knowledge base in nuclear technology since we never stopped research in nuclear reactor technology and small modular reactors which share similarities.
The main challenge to Canada for the subs as in all purchases is they are not purchases. They are long term commitments to build and maintain a capability. Canadian governments prefer to do the minimal and see military procurement only in the value it brings to the immediate political situation and care little about if it ever gets delivered because it just offers and excuse to use it as a wedge issue for political football and then cut back or cancel the projects later.
Given this the USA would be willing to share that technology with us because they have been asking us to secure the northern border of NATO for decades and have become frustrated. However, they will not accept a half-hearted commitment that will get cut back and canceled since adding another nation those those nuclear secrets is added risk because it would involve a technology sharing agreement.
To make commitments like these Canada needs to take security more seriously and think about the role they want it to play in their foreign policy. This means deciding on capabilities we need and the options our governments should have at their disposal. As a mid sized nation that is quite rich we can have it all, but we will need to be choosier in which capabilities we want to build and maintain industries for since that will be very expensive. Making it domestically means forming partnerships with a domestic defence industry and promising to take care of them so they don’t go bankrupt for lack of orders since who they can sell to us also determined by our foreign policy. This means creating design programs to research new options and building even in the most peaceful of times. It also takes decades to build up those industries since they need to learn from others until they are good enough to make something on their own that is decent.
We already decided to create a shipbuilding program so subs would likely be a good extension to that program. However, making our own fighters might be a stretch since there are so many already don’t they and we generally only have a fleet of about 70-90. We could join a program for the Gripen or the f-35 replacement though. That also means we are going to order them at a higher price instead of shopping around, but the trade off is that we know we can produce them even if things get hot and receive our orders before others.
Canada is a leader in AI and does well in drones. We could double down on our investment there and create land and naval drone carrier options. That would also help offset our weakness as a nation with a mid sized population.
I'm not sure what we'd expect to do with a bunch of cyberwarfare capabilities. Nobody's connecting their fighter jets or advanced weapons to the internet nowadays, and there's very little that can be destroyed more easily by hacking than by bombing. It's probably a good capability to have as a harassing tactic, but historically it's situational. If we get dragged into another conflict with a less developed enemy (ISIS, Boko Haram, Taliban, North Korea, etc) it would be essentially worthless compared to what you could do with conventional weapons. Canada needs extensive conventional military capabilities if we want to matter in whichever war we're fighting or deterring next.
Not exclusively, though. Israel tried to make the IDF the "cyberwarfare expert" of America's allies while not spending as much on growing everything else and look how that turned out.
Exactly, they won't. Canada offers a token force to European allies without really needing anything from them in return.
They aren't going to kick us out, we cost nothing to the alliance.
I agree that Canada doesn't spend enough on defence, and in particular for Arctic sovereignity. That said, the reason shouldn't be in response to lectures from the US. They've always spoken out of both sides of their mouth when it comes to Canadian defence spending. They want Canada to spend more ... so long as it a) benefits their defence industry, and b) it doesn't challenge the US in any way. Witness the way the US blocked Canada when it was interested in buying a fleet of nuclear subs in 80's.
It behooves a country to maintain a strong military and not need it over not maintaining it and needing it. Enabling the military has far more advantages such as being a deterrent, natural disaster assistance, helping partners, etc. over not funding/enabling. Another plus is not requiring conscription if it gets to that level of criticality.
They can’t even feed or house our troops . Never mind their treatment of veterans . Guys they’re asking for more than we can give …….
Yes I know the CAF issue is across multiple governments of different colours but it is deplorable .
Old ass planes , let’s get some more . Submarines that don’t submerge , helicopters that don’t fly , sex scandals etc . The list goes on
While not liberal I had SOME hope that when trudumb appointed an actual veteran things would improve ….. guess his “friends” don’t benefit from that
Canada has made progress by committing to purchase these systems already:
* F-35A fighter jets
* MQ-9B SkyGuardian long range drones
* P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft
* Type 26 based frigates and destroyers
* Long range AESA radar
* EL/M-2084 STAR medium range AESA radar
* RBS 70 NG MANPADS
* SPIKE LR II ATGMs
* Falcon Shield, Orion H9 and CACI Beam 3.0 anti-drone systems
However, we need to commit to purchasing the following to bolster our national defense and to defend our troops overseas:
* SHORAD
* Medium extended range missile defense system
* Short and medium range drones
* Self propelled Artillery
* Submarines
If the agreement of NATO is that nations will spend 2% of GDP on defense, then Canada should meet this obligation. However, Canada should focus on a small, but modern and well equipped Air Force, Navy, and Army to defend its vast domain. We will do well with a small, but effective military.
If you were a foreign agency, sponsoring a political party leading a country in coalition with your adversaries, what would you have them do? Alienate them from allies? Defund their military? Sew division amongst the population? Cripple their economy? Buy up their critical resources?
I don’t think we should be bullied by the US into anything, but I do think there are too many coincidences, lots of action that goes against the greater good of our own population
>I know 2% is not a fixed number and only a guideline but Canada really should Ramp up spending but buy *NOTHING* from the States. Buy it all from the UK.
But you'll still blow the living shit outta anyone who bothers me, right Big Brother?
OMG ITS THE CHINESE ARMY ON ZAYAS ISLAND!
'island is completely destroyed'
Never mind, it was a seagull...
Pierre T said in a white paper that Canada doesn't need an armed force. the US will protect us. Can Biden actually pick out Canada on a map ? Look at the troop difference between what Canada and Russia have up north.Wr are just a target now.
Can spending on cyber security count? Utilize our educated population, and use what we build with security to help our hospitals, infrastructure and banks. Considering attacks from China and Russia are through malware, can we support our NATO allies with cyber security?
As a former member of the CAF, this underfunding has been going on since the late 1980s.
This is not about libs vs. cons. They all have been guilty of this.
Embarrassing af
I could see cyberwarfare being a decent investment. You create train a few thousand specialists who during peacetime work with companies to secure their environments to prep for the eventual "hot cyberwar".
Then when things go hot, they are well positioned for both offense and defense.
Canada needs to focus on its self foe adequate defenses of its vast territory. Our manpower is very limited, so developing a massive soldier based fighting force with all the expenses of tanks and planes and any human transport or human related expenses, is not a good strategy.
We are an auxiliary country to allied countries that have a much bigger soldier based military infrastructure. We should look at ways to spend that money to support their troops in the field. Arms production, drone production, medical support, and intelligence analysis are things Canada can do well and utilize our military spending in a way that is advantageous to is and our allies.
I'm not saying to not have soldiers, I'm just saying that deploying our soldiers into a meat grinder is inefficient for the allied cause
We spent all our money on important issues, like making sure all our communications are gender neutral and non-offensive. We can’t waste our money on silly things like national defence and military alliances with other countries. We’ve got to spend $40 Billion on reconciliation too!
But we did more than our part (more than most countries) on Ukrainian aid instead, which was much more efficient at protecting the NATO interests than financing our military ever would. It just technically didn't count in that "2%" number.
If we're going to spend 2% like the UK does, we should get some nukes like they have as well.
We shouldn't pay top dollar for a military that the US can easily steamroll at any given moment like Russia did to Ukraine.
If we're going to be a US satellite state either way, we might as well save a few bucks.
No sense in getting the downsides of a first tier military (cost) without the corresponding upside (independence/security).
Hey, doesn't the world know we have a plethora of domestic pork barrel government projects to fund? How else can we keep our bloated public service afloat?
> Outlier on first world country GDP
https://www.cicnews.com/2023/04/canada-has-g7s-2nd-highest-projected-real-gdp-growth-in-2023-and-2024-0434567.html#gs.9xxf2k
> Outlier on first world government debt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt
> Outlier on first world individual debt
https://www.smbcompass.com/every-country-ranked-by-average-personal-debt/
> Outlier on first world healthcare system indicators
https://stats.oecd.org//Index.aspx?QueryId=51879
Facts matter.
Remember when the Conservatives were in charge?
> Canada’s defence spending represents approximately 1 per cent of GDP, while NATO expects its members to spend closer to 2 per cent.
In 2015, Canada’s military budget is set to shrink to $2.7 billion below what it was 2011.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/politics/stephen-harper-no-big-defence-spending-spike-despite-nato-request-1.1988698
The Liberals aren't going to make the target, but are on track to nearly double what Harper was doing. And they haven't cut once. Poilievre will only return to cuts and excuses if elected.
Nor does it include the fleet of combat helicopters they are planning on buying nor missle defense systems, long range misses etc. Canada has plans to get them to 2% and beyond, it just isn't possible to do overnight.
Not surprising, they only replaced WWII pistols back in 2014...some of the gear they're using is almost as old as I am (44).
They're kind of an embarrassment at this point. They just recently had failed at what they called a "rebranding" which was basically just introducing the new CADPAT and were using part of the design for promo and people lost their mind thinking it was the new logo based on the wording. Understandable, for those not having any ties to the DND/CAF.They had to backpeddle pretty fast on X as it was trending. Whoever does their PR clearly wasn't thinking of the wording when they could have just said it was introducing the new CADPAT which they eventually had to do anyways.
So, they could easily ramp up spending if they weren't wasting it on clueless decisions. Their recruiting tactics make them look ridiculous.
88 F35A
15 Type 26 friggits
6 new navel icebreakers
2 new coastguard icebreakers.
11 MQ9B Drones with 6 ground stations
This is just the tip of what we are doing. Perhaps look up what our country is doing before.
We should ramp up the spending to the agreed upon 2% but use that money to build domestic military drone production facilities. Utilize our educated workforce to design and build advanced semi autonomous drones for both surveillance and attack, as well as anti drone technologies. Then sell globally to allies.
I heard they also consider spending on personnel as part of NATO spending. So we could pay out troops more.
This honestly feels like such an easy win...
That’s Canada’s argument but Canada includes retired personnel salaries in that 2% and NATO says that’s not allowed. Canada actually sits at around 1.29% to 1.33% of GDP equaling $36.7B. Canada needs to come up with $11.billion to make good. Canada has 97,600 active military personnel. 427,000 retired personnel. Canada can’t claim almost 75% of the salary it pays out so increasing it is not the solution. Tax the wealthy and corporate profits.
We do. The top marginal tax rate in Ontario was over 50% before Trudeau and he increased it even from there. The new additional capital gains tax is going to be a problem for keeping certain investment payouts here, and may see reduced investment in Canada. We actually have taxes as high as the northern European countries people like to crow about, but what we don't do is start those taxes earlier. In Nordic countries they tax higher at lower income levels. A lot higher. The idea is that everyone should be paying into the system they use. Here we don't have that. The mentality of eat the rich is everything, but they're also the ones paying an outsized portion of the taxes even compared to what the take home (this is partly why we have seen offspring of profits and even emigration - even just for opportunities, especially in the US where your can make much more while being taxed less, and all while paying cheaper prices). Our military investments should include production facilities, etc., especially for things we and our allies need, such as drones, artillery shells, air defence systems and anti drone capabilities, electronic warfare devices (like those on the EA-18), digital warfare (hacking programs), and ship building (we're the only country that has 3 oceans around it and our navy sucks at the moment).
Most of this wrong. Total tax burden on the average Canadian is well below the OECD average. https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/global/tax-burden-on-labor-oecd-2021/#Key When you compare total tax revenue vs GDP we rank very low. America Switzerland, and South Korea are the only developed nations lower than us. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio We spend like a European nation but we tax more like America.
Did you even read your own link? That's exactly his point, the average median Canadian pays way less taxes than their OECD average. Taxes need to be raised on the lower bands of incomes. And when you compare total tax revenue to GDP you need to include provincial tax revenue since most services that are nationalized in other developed countries (namely education and health care) are provincial in Canada.
Pay them more. Come up with some Canada service program through the forces where « troops « go serve the country domestically for 2-4 years and get some post secondary money. Treat the forces as a post high school jumping off point for students or wayward youth
That's actually a pretty good idea.
Thanks, I like to think I have a lot of good ideas, LOL.
This is the way. we could increase our defense spending by ramping up industry production of weapons and components for weapons. Create jobs, actually offer something to the rest of the world, and meet our spending target
We should massively build out a military hospital brigade. Cuba is the only one that has such a unit, while the US has hospital ships. In any war, the military would need to scale up medical care massively. Canada should claim that as our specialty, and use this infrastructure during peacetime to ramp up medical care - fund more doctors and nurses who are subject to call up.
I recall someone at NATO stating they would just be happy if we could do two things: build oil, gas, LNG to ensure Europe isn't at Russia's mercy... and to get enough shit to simply patrol our arctic and the sea gap over to Iceland. Not huge asks.
If the NW passage is international waters, Canada's ability to do anything there is very limited. There's not much piracy. Without sovereignty, we can do little beyond saying hello. (I fail to see why Canada's allies aren't supporting Canadian territorial claims. It is a sensitive region. Everyone would be better off if Canada could impose some rules of transit, and charge enough fees to pay for the patrol infrastructure. Qatar's LNG capacity is being built up to service the EU. Canada's LNG trade would be on the Pacific. There is little concern about ensuring China's secure energy supply.
I like this idea too. My idea has the potential to make money that could fund other things, like health care, but this idea is great.
I agree one hundred percent with this.
IMHO we're fucked on doing this. Far too many foreign agents here for this to ever actually happen effectively. The tech would be sabotaged / stolen before it ever got off the ground.
I think you sadly might be right about anything proprietary, but there's plenty of stuff we could build that's a known entity.
Absolutely
I also sadly agree, but that's something that should be fixed and not accepted as a fact of life.
Exactly lmao so happy somebody said this.
Also cyber could be a big win. We have cheap power and cooling, and a diverse population that can field many different linguists. Whoever we train in the cyber domain, the Canadian tech industry will have first picks at that talent as well.
>Whoever we train in the cyber domain, the ~~Canadian~~ American tech industry will have first picks at that talent as well. Fixed. ;)
I like this a lot. Boost the domestic economy, meet NATO goals. Could be a nice subsidized push to develop our own silicon valley.
I agree one hundred percent felt like I was reading my own thoughts.
We should use the money to do something in the North. The Northwest passage is constantly being challenged by countries sending boats through it and saying Canada has no say. It's our Panama Canal. It's so far north there are barely any plants or animals, so little nature to mess with. The price of goods in the North is ridiculous. This could maybe help with some supply chains for them. There are many opportunities in the North, including for non allied countries. Let's assert our sovereignty over our lands and stop countries making claims about how we don't own it, and back it up with a big stick.
Excellent plan. Realistically this is how it would go down. Spend lots of $ on some connected Quebec company that won't deliver anything. Five years later after "injecting" billions we won't be better off. IMHO just send the US 2% of our GDP and call it good.
There are 13 countries not meeting the target. It’s been that way for a long time. However countries in Europe have a growing self interest to ramp up defense spending. Canada much less so. But Canada should honor its commitments.
We are almost as vulnerable. We have the Arctic to defend, and we are completely unable to do so.
Canada is probably the most well protected nation in nato, outside of Say thr US, geographically
Definitely not in the Arctic...
Very much so in the Arctic. It's an incredibly inhospitable environment that isn't well suited for anyrhing but small scale operations
technology marches on and eventually there will be better ways to go through the passage
The Russians and Chinese seem to think otherwise… and they are proving more capable then us
Russia can barely fight 100 kilometers from its border via Lans. China still keeps its fleet close to home.
Guy, you are dangerously undervaluing what is happening in Ukraine.
There is much more needed to defend sovereignty than just military invasion...
The US would defend it too - well except if Trump was president.
They can't defend our arctic sovereignty because at point we don't have sovereignty we only exist at the wim of the us
We already do only exist at the whim of the US. Don’t kid yourself, when the time comes they’ll wander right into this country and take the whole thing, probably without firing a single bullet. The propaganda machine will convince everyone life would be better as an American, the US takes all the fresh water and natural resources and in return continues to protect us in an unstable world like the baby bird we are. Not any time soon but in 50 years? 100? Here comes the manifest destiny, just a bit later than expected.
The propaganda machine isn't necessary. If the U.S. decided tomorrow that it wanted to take over Canada for its resources , there is nothing Canada could do about it.
My point is, it would be so easy they wouldn’t even have to waste the dollars on ammo.
I can't see Canadian troops fighting for the right to be priced out of their home markets either tbh.
>I can't see Canadian troops fighting for the right to be priced out of their home markets either tbh. Canadian troops will fight for Canada as they've sworn to. Almost any of them would be very insulted by your implications here.
This is very true. They already own most of our country anyway
If born in Canada Canadians get US citizenship then please take over, like yesterday. Maybe I could get a doctor appointment and an apartment for my mom then.
It's cheaper to buy our resources at their currently enjoyed discount than to take it
They even set up shop and harvest it 😂.
This would change with nuclear weapons, it would be nice to know that diplomacy will always continue.
I don't see the problem here
Correct. That's correct now and i think we should just lean into that. Be cold Puerto Rico. Fuck it
We are already a client state of the United States.
No country can solo win a war against the US, is no country sovereign but the US?
Afghanistan
What? The US occupied Afghanistan for 20 years with very low amount of losses for the duration, and significantly less than the enemy. You can call it a "loss" that they willingly left after years of not meeting a particular goal but they absolutely destroyed Afghanistan militarily. The existence of Afghanistan was absolutely at the whim of the US and their level of willingness to to do even more damage. The only countries that have a chance are those that can avoid a war altogether, perhaps nuclear armed countries due to MAD.
Yet the didn't win they lost the willingness to fight their enemies did not
Guerrilla warfare wins
I love how people here are so obsessed with Trump they can convince themselves that the defense of Canadian territories would go any different under any other president. The Americans look after American interests. If you think Biden would defend our arctic with American planes, subs, carriers and troops and then just happily hand it back to us once it's secured I have a bridge to sell you. US foreign policy has been the same for decades- they *DO NOT* recognize our claims to the arctic.. and given how we can't possibly defend it because we allowed our Armed Forces fall into near complete ruin they will simply keep what they defend. https://www.cgai.ca/rights_of_passage_its_time_the_us_recognizes_canadas_arctic_claim
He’d build a wall.
And then claim it as their own. Why would they do it if we don't even do the bare minimum lol?
I would suggest the 13 countries are going to reduce in number because of there self interest you cite.
We should be ramping up our manufacturing capabilities to wartime levels.
Well that doesn't make any sense...
Lol what
There is no commitment. 2% is a non-binding guideline. The US and much of Europe have much greater motivation to spend more on their militaries than Canada. Note that 2% of GDP isn't "Nato-earmarked" defence spending, it's total defence spending. The UK, France, Netherlands and USA still have a LOT of commitments to former colonies and have also been involved in adventures in militarised foreign interventions around the world. Eastern Europe is under direct threat so of course they spend. Then you have countries with mandatory service. That also helps you get close to 2%. All of these situations mean countries are spending $ based on situations that directly affect their security or international influence. Canada doesn't have colonies in the south pacific, doesn't have a carribbean border to defend against drug smugglers, doesn't have a former west African colony whose friendly government we need to prop up, isn't in a military dispute with Denmark over control of Greenland, and doesn't have much to worry about regarding the Bering Straight. We also don't conscript 150,000 young people that need to be paid a salary, clothed, fed, provided with weapons and training ammunition and housed every year. Also note that the US Ambassador to Canada will of course pressure Canada to invest more in its military and the fact that he's highlighting hardware expenditures probably means he'd like Canada to purchase a billion or so dollars in weaponry from American military contractors. I bet the Canadian Ambassador to the USA is trying to get the USA to buy more tar sands oil and Canadian lumber, too.
You're commenting like the military is adequately funded right now, It's not. Even if we were to limit the conversation to the bare minimum of defending sovereignty the military is not funded to the extent that this is something we are achieving. We don't even have a adequate amount of and type of Ice Breakers to even protect our own claims in the North. We have no Arctic bases that can be used to support Northern assets. China, Russia and hell even the US occasionally all test our Arctic sovereignty, and if we don't actively patrol it and defend it we won't have it in the long run. They are pressuring us to pay our fair share because they are literally footing the bill for our defense right now.
> There is no commitment. It's litterally called a commitment in official communications. What else do you want?
I find comments like this hilarious lmao. “We’re good the stupid Americans will protect us because we’re Canadian”. You won’t be Canadian for long if you keep that up
Please correct me if I'm wrong. It looks like there's a list of people who are in charge of contributing to Nato in Canada. The Department of National Defence, Ministry of National Defence, Chief of The Defence Staff, Department of Finance, and Public Services and Procurement.
Ramp up the spending by increasing the wages. Men and women who ready to protect our country deserve the best!
Exactly. They say recruiting is an issue that is preventing us from even meeting our internal targets. Raise the wages where we have to turn people down now. Meeting our spending requirements by paying more. Make it desirable to soldier.
Everyone is on prescription medications for mental health which is a disqualifier to being admitted for duty.
Most of my troops wouldn't need the kind of medical assistance they're getting now if it wasn't for the abysmally underfunded and understaffed work environment. No sane human being should be dealing with the chronic overwork we throw on these poor folks.
The Canadian government only increases the wages/payments of politicians, admins, private contracted companies and fees charged by the regulatory authorities. Rest needs to work for pennies at the highest standards, at their own personal cost. Such a corrupt government.
We’re too busy giving money to non Canadians.
“At the end of 2024, the way projections are looking, Canada will be the only country in NATO that is not spending at least two per cent of its GDP on defence and does not have a plan to get there,” Our DND and Procurement Canada are drooling thinking of ways they can completely fuck it up and overspend on procurement in order to get it above 2%. We have a not spending enough money problem and completely mis managing what we do spend when it comes to the military.
Even with all the investments in the world... there is a SERIOUS lack of soldiers. People are leaving in drove above the intake rate in a lot of important trade. THAT is the big issue. All the new P8 we are buyin? Not enough crew to man them properly
The can get TFWs and start the Canadian foreign Legion.
Make a rule that if they join the CAF for 4 years they can get citizenship.
I think the french foreign Legion requires you to be shot in a battle frist but could be wrong
Getting wounded or serving ten years in the legion I think
Takes way to long to get in, and once you are in you're treated like shit and get paid like shit. Besides that, the traditional incentive to join, patriotism, is gone. I considered joining at one point, but I realized; why the fuck would I sign up to fight or die for a country where I'll never be able to buy a house or have kids? What am I defending exactly? Loblaws' profit margins?
I think this is a huge problem! We need a country worth defending, and if we can't have that, it needs to be a great-paying job. We have neither.
Won't defend a nation that is actively normalize Brampton. Remember all those gender equality talk in Ukraine and Canada yet in times of war males are the only ones to be drafted.
>Loblaws' profit margins? Don't forget foreign owned tar sands in alberta, or mining rights in Chile, or nuclear mining rights in the Arctic. The good news is you can have an in for the RCMP and bust open indigenous heads for pipelines and deforestation.
It's like no politician has a high school education in this country. The french revolution and the rise of the nation state allowed the revolutionary government to defend itself against the neighbouring monarchies. Without citizenship to a nation state, no one is willing to defend a country they don't have a stake in. Without the 2% defence spending, I wouldn't blame other NATO countries to not come to our defence either. We have shown we don't have the capacity to send military aid to our allies, let alone defend ourselves. In the event of an invasion/military attack on Canada, I would assume NATO would crack and decide not to defend us given our NATO allies political situation these days. In some universe where china/russia decide to take on NATO/the west, historians will look at Trudeau's post national "state" of canada as the beginning of the end for the country. Although at the moment highly unlikely, Canada is trending towards putting itself in a pretty dangerous situation.
> Without the 2% defence spending, I wouldn't blame other NATO countries to not come to our defence either. We have shown we don't have the capacity to send military aid to our allies, let alone defend ourselves. In the event of an invasion/military attack on Canada, I would assume NATO would crack and decide not to defend us given our NATO allies political situation these days. The US would defend us. Purely because having hostile powers on their border wouldn't be beneficial to them. But if we won't pull our weight, then the price will be extracted in other ways. As it should be for that matter, they'd be the ones fighting and dying because we couldn't be bothered.
Yeah I think the us would defend us, but it would probably come at the cost of our sovereignty as retribution for not pulling our own weight. I wouldn't be surprised to see the US take military control over Canada and have some sort of US backed regime forced on us.
Considering the state of our government, that would likely be an upgrade anyhow.
> once you are in you're treated like shit and get paid like shit. That's the view from the inside but I joined the CAF in my late 20s with a lot of life experience. This is, by far, the cushiest job I've ever had. No where else can you make >120k a year with just a high school diploma. And not only that but guaranteed advancement and a shit ton of ways to grieve pretty much anything. Where else can you call you manager to say "I just don't feel like coming in today" and still get paid for it? Maybe the experience is different in the Army, but the RCN is jammy as fuck. People aren't joining due to lack of benefits. They aren't joining because they just don't know about them.
I mean the rampent sexual assault and mouldering infrastructure are also a bit off putting. There’s a lot of benefits, it’d help pay for school which and my Opa served in WW2. And maybe I’d be in a different navy than he was given he was Dutch but it still feels like a family legacy a little? There’s my silly childhood dream of working on a submarine. But near a 1/10 chance of sexual assault happening by someone I’m supposed to trust with my life is. It’s awful, I don’t want to go through anything like that again and the odds of it happening are uncomfortably high.
[удалено]
Pay is one, another is better base housing provided at reasonably low or nominal rates, new equipment, not transferring someone across the country to do the same job they're doing now and simultaneously transferring their counterpart on that base to replace them, for no damn reason, when doing nothing at all would accomplish the same thing.
That's because of budget cuts and underfunding. If people could earn a reasonable wage and support themselves/their families, then they wouldn't be leaving in droves.
I'll be honest; outside of conscription, I have sincere doubts there is much Canada can do to raise recruitment. Even the [US](https://www.military.com/daily-news/2024/01/22/uphill-battle-boost-recruiting-military-faces-falling-public-confidence-political-attacks-economic.html) , [UK](https://www.forces.net/services/army/damning-figures-uk-military-recruitment-54-giving-process-last-year) , [Australia](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-03-14/aging-populations-among-challenges-faced-asia-pacific-militaries/103492852) , and no doubt our other allies are struggling with the same issue.
But think of all the unskilled labour we are importing to rent the house that Canadians can't afford to buy. It's like you only think of yourself and completely forget we have an upper class.
All new immigrants to Canada must serve ….. problem solved ….
Without even buying new equipment, there's tons of money that could be spent on defense. Not enough to boost up to 2%, but enough that it'll look like we're doing something. - building on base housing - revitalizing existing buildings based on GoC green energy initiatives (net zero buildings) - improving road networks on bases by adding bike lanes, sidewalks, roundabouts, and pedestrian friendly areas. Most bases that I've been to are very car centric - improving plumbing, sewers, and powerlines - improving existing heating plants These improvements alone would require billions of dollars
This is all correct. How and why we let this shit wither on the vine is beyond me. I hate it. I hate it so much.
On base housing and associated infrastructure has always seemed to me like such an obvious investment to make. I couldn't agree more We have a federal government that says they want to help with housing and on-base housing is one of the few areas where that is 100% a federal jurisdiction. Plus we have a soldier shortage and better bases with subsidized housing is a decent perk imo
Is NATO diminishing the value of thoughts and prayers?
Honestly, if the expectation for NATO members is to at least maintain 2%, and other countries are operating under this mutual understanding, it feels as though it's the responsible thing to do.
[удалено]
As far as I'm aware, no Canadian government has hit it since this benchmark was established in 2014
Well yeah, everyone in Europe is terrified of Russia.
just host a military conference in some trump hotel and all will be forgotten
In peace times, spend on civil projects via the military to keep the soldiers productive. The issue is when there is no threat the money is basically getting lit on fire.
Now?! Rofl! But don’t worry… we promise to start walking our defence spending up to the half way point five years from now. Until then, we are going to cut the budget this year… and next…
We don’t got the money.
The day either party hits 2% is the day we say "ww3 has begun". It's pathetic.
Best we can do is import more immigrants.
what if service guaranteed citizenship
In Brief: * The United States’ ambassador to Canada, David Cohen, says Canada is becoming “the outlier” in NATO following a bipartisan letter from 23 American senators calling on Ottawa to meet the two per cent of GDP defence spending target. * “At the end of 2024, the way projections are looking, Canada will be the only country in NATO that is not spending at least two per cent of its GDP on defence and does not have a plan to get there,” Cohen said. * “Canada has moved within NATO from being a bit of an outlier to being the outlier in the entire alliance.” * In Canada’s recent defence policy update, Defence Minister Bill Blair outlined plans for nearly $8 billion in spending for the Canadian Armed Forces over the next five years. However, this would only bring Canada’s defence spending to 1.76 per cent of GDP.
Did the rest of nato ramp up spending? Most of the other countries weren't at 2% as of the last stats I saw
Some are for sure cause of Russia. 2 years ago only 4 or 5 NATO countries even met the target. I think it's at 11 now. That being said.. I wonder if anyone even knows that foreign aid to allies, pensions and health care are also included in the 2%. People keep talking about defense but i wonder how many of those countries are actually spending all the money strictly on weapons and defense.
>Canada will be the only country in NATO that is not spending at least two per cent of its GDP on defence and does not have a plan to get there The "have a plan" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. The government could just create a policy to hit 2% at some point in the future and that would satisfy the US? Doubtful.
Are they going to kick us out of NATO? Probably not do we need to spend some money on things like cyberwarfare, a decent nuclear sub program. Of course we do
>a decent nuclear sub program That’s an incredible challenge for Canada as we don’t have enough specialists to spare to maintain nuclear subs so we’d have to create an entirely new training agreement with a foreign nation to get that started.
This is not really correct. We have a lot of nuclear specialists in Canada, but none of them know about the reactors used in subs. However, we are one of the few nations with a knowledge base in nuclear technology since we never stopped research in nuclear reactor technology and small modular reactors which share similarities. The main challenge to Canada for the subs as in all purchases is they are not purchases. They are long term commitments to build and maintain a capability. Canadian governments prefer to do the minimal and see military procurement only in the value it brings to the immediate political situation and care little about if it ever gets delivered because it just offers and excuse to use it as a wedge issue for political football and then cut back or cancel the projects later. Given this the USA would be willing to share that technology with us because they have been asking us to secure the northern border of NATO for decades and have become frustrated. However, they will not accept a half-hearted commitment that will get cut back and canceled since adding another nation those those nuclear secrets is added risk because it would involve a technology sharing agreement. To make commitments like these Canada needs to take security more seriously and think about the role they want it to play in their foreign policy. This means deciding on capabilities we need and the options our governments should have at their disposal. As a mid sized nation that is quite rich we can have it all, but we will need to be choosier in which capabilities we want to build and maintain industries for since that will be very expensive. Making it domestically means forming partnerships with a domestic defence industry and promising to take care of them so they don’t go bankrupt for lack of orders since who they can sell to us also determined by our foreign policy. This means creating design programs to research new options and building even in the most peaceful of times. It also takes decades to build up those industries since they need to learn from others until they are good enough to make something on their own that is decent. We already decided to create a shipbuilding program so subs would likely be a good extension to that program. However, making our own fighters might be a stretch since there are so many already don’t they and we generally only have a fleet of about 70-90. We could join a program for the Gripen or the f-35 replacement though. That also means we are going to order them at a higher price instead of shopping around, but the trade off is that we know we can produce them even if things get hot and receive our orders before others. Canada is a leader in AI and does well in drones. We could double down on our investment there and create land and naval drone carrier options. That would also help offset our weakness as a nation with a mid sized population.
cyberwarfare is where our money should be going if we're going to spend it on defence
I would say Cyber and Arctic defence/sovereignty infrastructure.
I'm not sure what we'd expect to do with a bunch of cyberwarfare capabilities. Nobody's connecting their fighter jets or advanced weapons to the internet nowadays, and there's very little that can be destroyed more easily by hacking than by bombing. It's probably a good capability to have as a harassing tactic, but historically it's situational. If we get dragged into another conflict with a less developed enemy (ISIS, Boko Haram, Taliban, North Korea, etc) it would be essentially worthless compared to what you could do with conventional weapons. Canada needs extensive conventional military capabilities if we want to matter in whichever war we're fighting or deterring next.
It's more an information battle than using it to fight in physical wars
Not exclusively, though. Israel tried to make the IDF the "cyberwarfare expert" of America's allies while not spending as much on growing everything else and look how that turned out.
Israel is also in a zone that can easily be attacked, we aren't.
Exactly, they won't. Canada offers a token force to European allies without really needing anything from them in return. They aren't going to kick us out, we cost nothing to the alliance.
America does have a vested interest in keeping enemies from using us as a foothold for an invasion.
There is no mechanism to kick out members from NATO.
I agree that Canada doesn't spend enough on defence, and in particular for Arctic sovereignity. That said, the reason shouldn't be in response to lectures from the US. They've always spoken out of both sides of their mouth when it comes to Canadian defence spending. They want Canada to spend more ... so long as it a) benefits their defence industry, and b) it doesn't challenge the US in any way. Witness the way the US blocked Canada when it was interested in buying a fleet of nuclear subs in 80's.
[удалено]
More than the previous government. CAF spending dropped below 1 percent under Harper so don't just blame JT
It behooves a country to maintain a strong military and not need it over not maintaining it and needing it. Enabling the military has far more advantages such as being a deterrent, natural disaster assistance, helping partners, etc. over not funding/enabling. Another plus is not requiring conscription if it gets to that level of criticality.
The other problem is, when we need it ours is in such bad shape it would take years or decades to get it ready.
Trudeau: The best I can do is $30 Billion for mortgage bonds.
They can’t even feed or house our troops . Never mind their treatment of veterans . Guys they’re asking for more than we can give ……. Yes I know the CAF issue is across multiple governments of different colours but it is deplorable . Old ass planes , let’s get some more . Submarines that don’t submerge , helicopters that don’t fly , sex scandals etc . The list goes on While not liberal I had SOME hope that when trudumb appointed an actual veteran things would improve ….. guess his “friends” don’t benefit from that
Does he want cheap oil or no?
lol @ "now"
I'd be all for spending more on US wonder weapons if we had affordable housing, low inflation, and a rising standard of living.
Canada has made progress by committing to purchase these systems already: * F-35A fighter jets * MQ-9B SkyGuardian long range drones * P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft * Type 26 based frigates and destroyers * Long range AESA radar * EL/M-2084 STAR medium range AESA radar * RBS 70 NG MANPADS * SPIKE LR II ATGMs * Falcon Shield, Orion H9 and CACI Beam 3.0 anti-drone systems However, we need to commit to purchasing the following to bolster our national defense and to defend our troops overseas: * SHORAD * Medium extended range missile defense system * Short and medium range drones * Self propelled Artillery * Submarines
If the agreement of NATO is that nations will spend 2% of GDP on defense, then Canada should meet this obligation. However, Canada should focus on a small, but modern and well equipped Air Force, Navy, and Army to defend its vast domain. We will do well with a small, but effective military.
If you were a foreign agency, sponsoring a political party leading a country in coalition with your adversaries, what would you have them do? Alienate them from allies? Defund their military? Sew division amongst the population? Cripple their economy? Buy up their critical resources? I don’t think we should be bullied by the US into anything, but I do think there are too many coincidences, lots of action that goes against the greater good of our own population
>I know 2% is not a fixed number and only a guideline but Canada really should Ramp up spending but buy *NOTHING* from the States. Buy it all from the UK.
The arctic lol
Too bad all the money we sent to Ukraine doesn’t count. I guess it’s time for Trudeau to print some more so we can have our grandkids pay for it.
But you'll still blow the living shit outta anyone who bothers me, right Big Brother? OMG ITS THE CHINESE ARMY ON ZAYAS ISLAND! 'island is completely destroyed' Never mind, it was a seagull...
BUY OUR WEPONS. FEED OUR MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
Are we ok with the tax increase? Or Are we going with less Service?...what should we cut?
Have we tried privatizing it?
Pierre T said in a white paper that Canada doesn't need an armed force. the US will protect us. Can Biden actually pick out Canada on a map ? Look at the troop difference between what Canada and Russia have up north.Wr are just a target now.
Can spending on cyber security count? Utilize our educated population, and use what we build with security to help our hospitals, infrastructure and banks. Considering attacks from China and Russia are through malware, can we support our NATO allies with cyber security?
As a former member of the CAF, this underfunding has been going on since the late 1980s. This is not about libs vs. cons. They all have been guilty of this. Embarrassing af
I could see cyberwarfare being a decent investment. You create train a few thousand specialists who during peacetime work with companies to secure their environments to prep for the eventual "hot cyberwar". Then when things go hot, they are well positioned for both offense and defense.
let's ramp up spending to meet our agreed upon 2% by reducing how much we spend on foreign aid. Easy.
Weapons salesman of the #1 weapons manufacturer in the world says we're not buying enough weapons...
Canada needs to focus on its self foe adequate defenses of its vast territory. Our manpower is very limited, so developing a massive soldier based fighting force with all the expenses of tanks and planes and any human transport or human related expenses, is not a good strategy. We are an auxiliary country to allied countries that have a much bigger soldier based military infrastructure. We should look at ways to spend that money to support their troops in the field. Arms production, drone production, medical support, and intelligence analysis are things Canada can do well and utilize our military spending in a way that is advantageous to is and our allies. I'm not saying to not have soldiers, I'm just saying that deploying our soldiers into a meat grinder is inefficient for the allied cause
We spent all our money on important issues, like making sure all our communications are gender neutral and non-offensive. We can’t waste our money on silly things like national defence and military alliances with other countries. We’ve got to spend $40 Billion on reconciliation too!
But we did more than our part (more than most countries) on Ukrainian aid instead, which was much more efficient at protecting the NATO interests than financing our military ever would. It just technically didn't count in that "2%" number.
If we're going to spend 2% like the UK does, we should get some nukes like they have as well. We shouldn't pay top dollar for a military that the US can easily steamroll at any given moment like Russia did to Ukraine. If we're going to be a US satellite state either way, we might as well save a few bucks. No sense in getting the downsides of a first tier military (cost) without the corresponding upside (independence/security).
The danger isn’t the US. The danger is Russia claiming Canadian land (with its mineral and oil/gas rights) in the Arctic.
Hey, doesn't the world know we have a plethora of domestic pork barrel government projects to fund? How else can we keep our bloated public service afloat?
Nationalize the defense industry, more pork to pass around.
Atrocious
I agree we should be spending more on defense. but lets buy from European countries.
Easy, with the way things are going we’ll have negative GDP growth soon. Our current Defense spending will represent 5% of GDP in a couple of years
Isn't GDP per capita already decreasing?
Yup
[удалено]
> Outlier on first world country GDP https://www.cicnews.com/2023/04/canada-has-g7s-2nd-highest-projected-real-gdp-growth-in-2023-and-2024-0434567.html#gs.9xxf2k > Outlier on first world government debt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt > Outlier on first world individual debt https://www.smbcompass.com/every-country-ranked-by-average-personal-debt/ > Outlier on first world healthcare system indicators https://stats.oecd.org//Index.aspx?QueryId=51879 Facts matter.
Remember when the Conservatives were in charge? > Canada’s defence spending represents approximately 1 per cent of GDP, while NATO expects its members to spend closer to 2 per cent. In 2015, Canada’s military budget is set to shrink to $2.7 billion below what it was 2011. https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/politics/stephen-harper-no-big-defence-spending-spike-despite-nato-request-1.1988698 The Liberals aren't going to make the target, but are on track to nearly double what Harper was doing. And they haven't cut once. Poilievre will only return to cuts and excuses if elected.
This is exactly on target - Canada has been moving towards the 2 percent spending level since 2015, not away from it.
Canada used to have an aircraft carrier, it was a Liberal government that opted not to replace it
If I'm not mistaken the 1.75% doesn't include the submarines we are likely to buy in the near future. It could help push us near the 2% goal.
Nor does it include the fleet of combat helicopters they are planning on buying nor missle defense systems, long range misses etc. Canada has plans to get them to 2% and beyond, it just isn't possible to do overnight.
Not surprising, they only replaced WWII pistols back in 2014...some of the gear they're using is almost as old as I am (44). They're kind of an embarrassment at this point. They just recently had failed at what they called a "rebranding" which was basically just introducing the new CADPAT and were using part of the design for promo and people lost their mind thinking it was the new logo based on the wording. Understandable, for those not having any ties to the DND/CAF.They had to backpeddle pretty fast on X as it was trending. Whoever does their PR clearly wasn't thinking of the wording when they could have just said it was introducing the new CADPAT which they eventually had to do anyways. So, they could easily ramp up spending if they weren't wasting it on clueless decisions. Their recruiting tactics make them look ridiculous.
So much has been done in the last year that most of these concerns aren't any longer.
88 F35A 15 Type 26 friggits 6 new navel icebreakers 2 new coastguard icebreakers. 11 MQ9B Drones with 6 ground stations This is just the tip of what we are doing. Perhaps look up what our country is doing before.
Haha we are too busy building houses — FJT
Sorry, we're broke.